Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)
neil: now we can safely say the nsa more than just kind of broke the law. try thousands of times. welcome, everybody. i'm neil cavuto. not just fine. don't take it for me. take it from despise himself. an internal audit out of no less than the national curity agency it's often define 200776 violations of established court orders regarding surveillance on americans, are targets in this country. with the nsa demands in a speech read what anyone else would call ridiculous. hundreds of cases of supposedly unintended interception of u.s. e-mail and phone calls and typographical errors that prompted overly aggressive searches. this group for one thing, not responding to them or even reporting them is quite another. it's not only sloppy but illegal and now we come to find that the smartest intelligence surveillance court that is supposed to keep an eye on them to not even learn about some of these violations until months after the fact willing among constituonal which is kind of like locking the barn door after all the animals left. my friends, step back and ponder the sheer magnitude o
into a corner. the nsa, the prosecution of edwards noted for leaking to a journalist, it has leaked to journalists and members of congress in order to conduct a pr campaign about what a great job. so how can it be criminal for edwards noted but not for the people to leak otherwise? neil: yes he is responsible for this chatter that we are getting now. we didn't have these surveillance programs and so we must be using the same means. >> unless this is some sort of exaggerated effort, do you think that is what is going on? >> i think we thought that as well. >> so because the middle east will always give you reasons for this. >> of course. and you can only say that that they'll they did not ring reuters reported that they have asked the internet service providers for passwords and we really think we are safer when the government has our password? is that day, what are they going to ask for next? this is a dangerous slippery slope that we learned that the nsa is sharing some spy secrets with one person and the federal government. it is absolutely prohibited from doing that. law-enforcem
. we have probably some nsa intel, some sigint, there is some sort of collaboration among these franchise groups. it m have something to do with the end of ramadan this coming week and a variety of other activities. you know, they smell some blood in the water perhaps, some weaknesses that we have demonstrated. and now, out o abundance of caution, as you indicate, neil, we are going to close things down. and i suspect, what you probably will not see, but is happening, is we're staging forward, in the ropean and african area of operations as well as central commd. we have special opering fors ready to go to the aid of some of these embassies. you won't that out until something happens. neil: wish we had done that in benghazi but that is then, this is now. what is interesting about all the reports and you guys certainly knowar more than i do you by see the name al qaeda popping up again and again and again. >> isn't that interesting. neil: i want to know your take on tha >> this is very interesting because this is an opportunity for the state department to dig themselves out
mind the question of how complicit different companies were in the nsa scandal. that is a lit je let jet matt q. but, at same time, google is doing with that data is trying to sell you stuff for the most part. what the nsa is doing is trying to find a reason to put new jail. neil: they can take leaps with that and share that with a lot of folks, that we never intended to happen. katherine thank you very much. now to lawyer who is livid. rebecca rose woodland said that by breaking into your e-mails is breaking the law. rebecca. google says no, this is a part of what you sign up for as a g-mail user, and as a g-ml receiver. >> how can a g-mail receiver sign up anything? neil: apparently, when you open that e-mail,l, you become vulnerable. >> and i knew? did you know. first of all you don't distinguish where it is from, you don't accept the terms with every e-mail does a come a question, do you accept the terms of that g-mail user's account, they don't get that, if that i want to take my information, aol users all net thrown out to every e-mail user, if they want to save it they can tou
discussed it would have been buried. i believe he was in favor of what nsa was doing this operation -- >> you sayg he knew? >> i say i find it difficult to believe as an american citizen he did not a clue at extend of what they are doing, he is our coder in chief, he is in charge. iin my mind, how many committees e worth while? >> that is what i was thinking, commissions and their work pile up largely ignored. >> you are putting james clapper in charge of investigating james clapper, he is in charge of investigatng -- >> you find that odd? >> bizarre, and i watch that press conrence, it was a great defense of obamacare, but a horrible defense of this. because, you are right. no president wants toave another 9/11 on their watch. nobody. they will go to whatever measures they will go to to prevent it from happening, i think measures a way too extreme. i'm not comfortable them. i am opposed to it. it has gone wayyoverboard, so, my attitude is, don't have another commission, you know what you are doing, you don't need t to investigate it, clappr investigating clap ser really clper is re
Search Results 0 to 16 of about 17 (some duplicates have been removed)